Scotland Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943427264
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Laurinburg, NC, USA
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$890,000
Expenses
$473,872
Assets
$11,141,569
Liabilities
$9,687,374

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANDREW WILLIAMSON (VICE CHAIRMAN)
  • DELORES A HAMMOND (SEC./TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Primarily, the goal of Scotland Development Corporation is to assist in developing the individuals in the community to be productive citizens with self esteem primarily motivated by work force development and training. Recently, Scotland Development Corporation has joined with St.Andrews University in an effort to keep the university open in Scotland County so that the community will be able to be viable economically and provide education to the citizens in this economically disadvantaged area.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scotland Development Corporation continues to provide opportunities for economic development in the Scotland County Area by conducting and supporting projects and activities that promote educational advancement to displaced workers and those pursuing a college degree. Specifically, Scotland Development Corporation has joined with St.Andrews University to help ensure that secondary education is avaiable in Scotland County. Having a university in this area is vital to economic development and educational advancement for the citizens of Southeastern North Carolina.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 23.51; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.87; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $474K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.